Strategies Of Manipulation

 Information, Political  Comments Off on Strategies Of Manipulation
Feb 232017
 

The Strategies and Techniques of the Elite for the Manipulation of Public Opinion and Society

Strategies Of Manipulation

1. The strategy of distraction

The prime element of social control is the strategy of distraction consisting of deviating the public attention from the important problems and from the mutations decided by the political and economic elites by means of the flooding technique or the continuous inundation of distractions and insignificant information.

The strategy of distraction is equally indispensable to prevent the public from getting interested in the essential knowledge in areas of science, economy, psychology, neurology and cybernetics.

“To maintain the public attention distracted, away form the true social problems, captivated by subjects of no real importance. To maintain the public busy, busy, without any time to think; going back to the farm with the other animals.”

2. Create problems, then offer solutions

This method is also known as “problem-reaction-solution”. It creates a problem, a foreseen “situation” to provoke a certain reaction in the public in order to make this one the demanding force of measures that are desired to be accepted.For example: to let urban violence develop and intensify, or to organize bloody terrorist attempts in order for the public to demand laws of security or police-oriented ones in detriment of freedom. Or also: to create an economic crisis to make accepted the backward movement of social rights and the breaking down of public services as a necessary evil.

3. The strategy of degradation

To make accepted an unacceptable measure it is sufficient to apply it progressively, in a “degraded” manner, over a duration of 10 years. It is in this way that radically new socio-economic conditions have been imposed during the years 1980 to 1990. Massive unemployment, lacking, flexibility, relocation, salaries that no longer secure a decent income, so many changes that would have provoked a revolution should they be abruptly applied.

4. The strategy of differing

Another way of making accepted an unpopular decision is to present it as “painful but necessary”, obtaining the agreement of the public in the moment for the future application. It is easier to accept a future sacrifice than an immediate one. Firstly, because the effort is not deployed immediately.Next, because the public, the people, have always the tendency to naïvely hope that “all will go better tomorrow” and that the demanded sacrifice may be avoided. Anyway, this allows more time for the public to be accustomed to the idea and to accept it with resignation when the moment comes. Recent example: the move to the Euro and the loss of their economic and monetary sovereignty have been accepted by the European countries from 1994 to 1995 for their application in the year 2001. Another example: the multilateral agreements ofALCA (or FTAA) that the United States have imposed in the year 2001 to the countries of all the American continent (Central and South America) in spite of their reticence, conceding an application and the coming into force in the year 2005.

5. To address the public as children of younger age

The majority of the publicity “spots” addresses the public at large with the use of a discourse, arguments, personages, and a tone particularly infantile, many times near the weak, as if the spectator were a child of younger age or a mental handicapped. The more it intends to seek the deception of the spectator or listener, the more it is its tendency to adopt an infantile tone. Why? If it is addressed to a person as if he or she had 12 year of age, then, by reason of suggestion, he or she would also have, with a certain probability, a response or reaction that is lacking of a critical sense same as is the case of a person of 12 years of age.”

6. To utilize an emotional aspect rather than a reflection

To make use of the emotional aspect is a classic technique for making a short-circuit to the rational analysis, and hence to the critical sense of individuals. Besides, the utilization of the emotional registry allows us to open an access door to the unconscious to implant or to insert ideas, wishes, fears or worries, pulsations, or to induce behaviors.

7. To maintain the public in ignorance and stupidity

To make it in a way that the public is unable to comprehend the technologies and the methods utilized for their control and slavery. “The quality of the education given to the lower social classes must be the poorest or the most mediocre possible, in a way that the breach of ignorance that isolates the lower classes from the upper social classes must be and remain incomprehensible to the lower social classes.”

8. To promote in the public complacency with mediocrity

To promote in the public the idea that being stupid, vulgar and uneducated is “cool”.

9. To replace revolt with guilt

To make the individual believe that he himself is the only responsible for his misfortune, the cause of the insufficiency of his intelligence, of his capacities, or his efforts. Thus, instead of rebelling against the economic system, the individual self-devaluates and self-blames, which generates a depressive state, one of its effects is the inhibition of action. And without action, there is no revolution!

10. To know individuals better than they know themselves

In the course of the last 50 years, the accelerated advances of science have generated a growing breach between the knowledge of the public and that one possessed and utilized by the leading elites. Thanks to biology, neurology and applied psychology, the “system” has achieved an advanced knowledge of the human being, both physically and psychologically. The system has been able to know the common individual better than what the individual know about himself. This means that in the majority of cases, the system possesses a greater control and a greater power over individuals than what individuals have over themselves.

 

The Mainstream Media’s Incestuous Relationships With The Obama Administration

 Political  Comments Off on The Mainstream Media’s Incestuous Relationships With The Obama Administration
Feb 212017
 

Keeping It In The Family: The media’s incestuous relationships with the Obama Administration

A glimpse of the revolving door that existed between Mainstream Media network executives and the Obama White House. The map below gives us a glance at the media’s incestuous relationships with the administration.

It is a tangled web, in the Sir Walter Scott sense of the term… “Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

Keeping It In The Family: The Mainstream Media’s Incestuous Relationships With The Obama Administration

↑Click image to enlarge↑



New York Times Op-Ed Headline: “How Can We Get Rid of Trump?”

 Political  Comments Off on New York Times Op-Ed Headline: “How Can We Get Rid of Trump?”
Feb 202017
 
More Proof That The Mainstream Media Works For The Democrats and Is The Enemy Of The People.

New York Times Op-Ed Headline: "How Can We Get Rid of Trump?"

The real question is: How can we get rid of the New York Times?

We’re just a month into the Trump presidency, and already so many are wondering: How can we end it?

One poll from Public Policy Polling found that as many Americans — 46 percent — favor impeachment of President Trump as oppose it. Ladbrokes, the betting website, offers even odds that Trump will resign or leave office through impeachment before his term ends.

Sky Bet, another site, is taking wagers on whether Trump will be out of office by July.

There have been more than 1,000 references to “Watergate” in the news media in the last week, according to the Nexis archival site, with even some conservatives calling for Trump’s resignation or warning that he could be pushed out. Dan Rather, the former CBS News anchor who covered Watergate, says that Trump’s Russia scandal isn’t now at the level of Watergate but could become at least as big.

Maybe things will settle down. But what is striking about Trump is not just the dysfunction of his administration but also the — vigorously denied — allegations that Trump’s team may have cooperated with Vladimir Putin to steal the election. What’s also different is the broad concern that Trump is both: 1) unfit for office, and 2) dangerously unstable. One pro-American leader in a foreign country called me up the other day and skipped the preliminaries, starting with: “What the [expletive] is wrong with your country?”

So let’s investigate: Is there any way out?

Read more of this bias crap…

Lets just keep calling the The Mainstream Media what it is “Very Fake News”. Expose their lies and screw ups so the rest of the world can see them too. When you smash their credibility it doesn’t matter what they say; no one will care.

 

Obama/Soros/Clinton-Linked Activists Have A ‘Training Manual’ For Protesting Trump

 Political  Comments Off on Obama/Soros/Clinton-Linked Activists Have A ‘Training Manual’ For Protesting Trump
Feb 182017
 

Obama/Soros/Clinton-Linked Activists Have A ‘Training Manual’ For Protesting Trump

An Obama-tied activist group training tens of thousands of agitators to protest President Trump’s policies plans to hit Republican lawmakers supporting those policies even harder this week, when they return home for the congressional recess and hold town hall meetings and other functions.

Organizing for Action, a group founded by Obama and featured prominently on his new post-presidency website, is distributing a training manual to anti-Trump activists that advises them to bully GOP lawmakers into backing off support for repealing ObamaCare, curbing immigration from high-risk Islamic nations, and building a border wall.

In a new Facebook post, OFA calls on activists to mobilize against Republicans from now until Feb. 26, when “representatives are going to be in their home districts.”

The protesters disrupted town halls earlier this month, including one held in Utah by House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz, who was confronted by hundreds of angry demonstrators claiming to be his constituents.

The manual, published with OFA partner “Indivisible,” advises protesters to go into halls quietly so as not to raise alarms, and “grab seats at the front of the room but do not all sit together.” Rather, spread out in pairs to make it seem like the whole room opposes the Republican host’s positions. “This will help reinforce the impression of broad consensus.” It also urges them to ask “hostile” questions — while keeping “a firm hold on the mic” — and loudly boo the the GOP politician if he isn’t “giving you real answers.”

“Express your concern [to the event’s hosts] they are giving a platform to pro-Trump authoritarianism, racism, and corruption,” it says.

The goal is to make Republicans, even from safe districts, second-guess their support for the Trump agenda, and to prime “the ground for the 2018 midterms when Democrats retake power.”

The goal is to make Republicans, even from safe districts, second-guess their support for the Trump agenda
“Even the safest [Republican] will be deeply alarmed by signs of organized opposition,” the document states, “because these actions create the impression that they’re not connected to their district and not listening to their constituents.”

After the event, protesters are advised to feed video footage to local and national media.

“Unfavorable exchanges caught on video can be devastating” for Republican lawmakers, it says, when “shared through social media and picked up by local and national media.” After protesters gave MSNBC, CNN and the networks footage of their dust-up with Chaffetz, for example, the outlets ran them continuously, forcing Chaffetz to issue statements defending himself.

The manual also advises protesters to flood “Trump-friendly” lawmakers’ Hill offices with angry phone calls and emails demanding the resignation of top White House adviser Steve Bannon.

A script advises callers to complain: “I’m honestly scared that a known racist and anti-Semite will be working just feet from the Oval Office … It is everyone’s business if a man who promoted white supremacy is serving as an adviser to the president.”

The document provides no evidence to support such accusations.

Protesters, who may or may not be affiliated with OFA, are also storming district offices. Last week, GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher blamed a “mob” of anti-Trump activists for knocking unconscious a 71-year-old female staffer at his Southern California office. A video of the incident, showing a small crowd around an opening door, was less conclusive.

Separately, OFA, which is run by ex-Obama officials and staffers, plans to stage 400 rallies across 42 states this year to attack Trump and Republicans over ObamaCare’s repeal.

“This is a fight we can win,” OFA recently told its foot soldiers. “They’re starting to waver.”

On Thursday, Trump insisted he’s moving ahead with plans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, which has ballooned health-insurance premiums and deductibles. “Obamacare is a disaster, folks,” he said, adding that activists protesting its repeal are hijacking GOP town halls and other events.

“They fill up our rallies with people that you wonder how they get there,” the president said. “But they’re not the Republican people that our representatives are representing.”

As The Post reported, OFA boasts more than 250 offices nationwide and more than 32,000 organizers, with another 25,000 actively under training. Since November, it’s beefed up staff and fundraising, though as a “social welfare” non-profit, it does not have to reveal its donors.

These aren’t typical Black Lives Matter or Occupy Wall Street marchers, but rather professionally trained organizers who go through a six-week training program similar to the training — steeped in Alinsky agitation tactics — Obama received in Chicago when he was a community organizer.

Chicago socialist Saul Alinsky, known by the left as “the father of community organizing,” taught radicals to “rub raw the sores of discontent” and create the conditions for a “revolution.” He dedicated his book, “Rules for Radicals,” to “Lucifer.” Michelle Obama quoted from the book when she helped launch OFA in 2013.

Obama appears to be behind the anti-Trump protests. He praised recent demonstrations against Trump’s travel ban. And last year, after Trump’s upset victory, he personally rallied OFA troops to “protect” his legacy in a conference call. “Now is the time for some organizing,” he said. “So don’t mope” over the election results.

He promised OFA activists he would soon join them in the fray.

“Understand that I’m going to be constrained in what I do with all of you until I am again a private citizen, but that’s not so far off,” he said. “You’re going to see me early next year, and we’re going to be in a position where we can start cooking up all kinds of great stuff.”

Added the ex-president: “I promise you that next year Michelle and I are going to be right there with you, and the clouds are going to start parting, and we’re going to be busy. I’ve got all kinds of thoughts and ideas about it, but this isn’t the best time to share them.

“Point is, I’m still fired up and ready to go, and I hope that all of you are, as well.”

Source…

 

Feb 182017
 

In December when Michael Flynn talked with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, Flynn said it was to discuss logistics of a call between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Apparently they also discussed the sanctions imposed by outgoing President Barack Obama on Russia for their assumed and alleged “hacking” of the U.S. election in November.

By way of retaliation, based on the allegations of meddling in the election, Obama imposed sanctions that included kicking out 35 Russian officials and closing down two Russian-owned compounds in the U.S. President Putin said the next day that he had no intention of retaliating against Obama’s sanctions, but said he’d wait and deal with the Trump Administration.

Flynn, when recounting his discussion with the Russian Ambassador, obviously talked about Obama’s sanctions, but averred that he hadn’t. And technically, this was Flynn’s error – he lost the confidence of the President and the Vice President by not telling them that sanctions were in fact discussed. Even in his press conference this week President Trump said Flynn wouldn’t have been doing his job if he hadn’t discussed Obama’s sanctions. The sin was not in discussing the sanctions, the sin was in not telling his bosses that he had.

And this is where the political assassination of Michael Flynn occurred. According to the Washington Post, an intelligence source contacted them revealing, illegally, that the December 29th call between Flynn and Kislyak did include discussion of the Obama sanctions. It’s a felony to disclose intelligence data and information. And in order for an intelligence insider to leak something so inconsequential, it was obviously intended to cause political damage to the administration. There really can be no other viable explanation as to why someone in our intelligence apparatus would go public with such a disclosure.

Michael Flynn Did Not Violate The Logan Act

Many have attempted to claim that Flynn violated the Logan Act, since he was not yet functioning in his new appointment as the National Security Advisor. This is a red herring. The Logan Act dates to 1799, when a state legislator with no ties to any administration tried to assert himself as a personal negotiator for final peace with France. The anti-Jefferson Federalists did not like this private initiative, so they passed the Logan Act to make private ventures intent on negotiating personal treaties over international feuds a crime. A representative of an incoming or an outgoing administration is functioning in their official, or official-to-be, capacity, and are not acting a private citizens. Apparently Flynn was addressing Obama’s sanctions against Russia, not negotiating for them. And as President Trump said this week, Flynn would not have been doing his job properly if he didn’t broach the subject of Obama’s sanctions.

 
Source…